Quite a reasonable response on the face of it but I think he overplays the solidarity within the Jewish community a bit esp. with regards to the 2 state solution. There are a whole bunch of views (eg. just contrast Morry’s and mine previously) on what would constitute an acceptable outcome or even parameters to begin discussion/negotiation.

Thanks for the article – the delivery was good but the message is the same. defene of Gaza invasion and silence on the wall inside the West bank, expanding settlements, exclusive roads and a state that will not control its borders, air space,electronic communications, without an army or the power to sign military agreements.The article did not mention these substantive issues. So who compromises with whom ?

Noting that Israel is the most powerful military force in the region and would provide a security guarantee to Palestine, why would you think they should waste their money on a modern armed forces (when the money could be better used for infrastructure and economic development) and who would they need to sign military agreements with?

As to the Gaza invasion – you do concede that Hamas (or people they could control) were shooting rockets into Israel don’t you? What do you think Israel should have done?

(Bearing in mind that they were negotiating with a religious fundamentalist reactionary regime of the worst kind that refuses to recognise them and openly promotes the worst kind of anti-Jewish propaganda.)